logo
DRAFT

Information on the distribution, intensity, impact and economic value of mobile bottom contacting gear (MBCG) fisheries within the Baltic Sea area and associated subdivisions, and estimated consequences and costs (landings weight, landings value) of reducing their relative extent.

Baltic Sea

Summary

text summary

Table 1

Table 1. Values of pressure and impact indicators for 2017-2022 for three depth strata in the Baltic Sea area. Values of I-1, I-2, I-3, I-4, I-6a, I-6b, I-7a and I-7b are annual means and I-5 is evaluated over the six years. Descriptions of the pressure and impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

Indicators 0 to 200 m 200 to 400 m 400 m to 800 m
Average fishing intensity (I-1) 0.15 0 0
Proportion of fished c-squares (I-2) 0.24 0 0
Proportion of area fished (I-3) 0.08 0 0
Smallest prop. of c-squares with 90% of total fishing intensity (I-4) 0.07 NA NA
Proportion of persistently unfished c-squares (I-5) 0.76 1 1
Average PD impact (I-6a) 0.00 0 0
Average PD-sens impact (I-6b) 0.00 0 0
Proportion of c-squares with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) 1.00 1 1
Proportion of c-squares with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b) 1.00 1 1

Figure 1

Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the Baltic Sea area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means.

**Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the Baltic Sea area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means. **

Table 2

Table 2. Contribution of small-scale fisheries (vessels <12 m overall length) to total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) in the Baltic Sea area. The table shows the total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) by FAO region over the period 2017-2021, and the mean contribution (%), both mean and observed range of small-scale MBCG fisheries. This analysis is based on EU STECF Fisheries Dependent Information (FDI) effort data, which includes consistent information of SSF effort (while ICES VMS data does not). Please see the Main Advice for more information.

FAO region code FAO region name Total fishing effort (kW * Fishing days Mean contribution SSF (%) Observed range SSF contribution (%) [min - max]
27.3.b.23 The Sound 11237.00 41.83 [7 - 75]
27.3.c.22 Belt Sea 746329.50 22.67 [18 - 30]
27.3.d.24 Baltic West of Bornholm 449995.67 11.67 [11 - 13]
27.3.d.25 Southern Central Baltic - West 695690.17 5.67 [3 - 8]
27.3.d.26 Southern Central Baltic - East 417785.00 0.00 [0 - 0]
27.3.d.27 West of Gotland 37278.33 30.83 [14 - 71]
27.3.d.28.1 Gulf of Riga 2091.50 100.00 [100 - 100]
27.3.d.28.2 East of Gotland (Open sea) 83623.67 9.00 [6 - 13]
27.3.d.29 Archipelago Sea 4063.33 65.00 [18 - 100]
27.3.d.30 Bothnian Sea 30355.17 52.33 [10 - 89]
27.3.d.31 Bothnian Bay 127202.00 57.67 [53 - 63]

Fishing intensity

text pressure

Table 3

Table 3. Extent (in km2 and %) of broad habitat types in the Baltic Sea area, and mean annual estimates of MBCG fishing intensity, landings weight, and landings value. In addition, estimates of the average annual proportion of the fished extent, the smallest proportion of the habitat extent affected by 90% of the fishing effort, and the proportion of unfished extent are provided.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Relative habitat abundance (%) Landings (x1000 tonnes) Value (x106 euro) Swept area (x1000 km2) Average fishing intensity (I-1) Average annual extent fished (%) Smallest proportion of extent with 90% of fishing effort Percentage extent unfished (%)
Circalittoral mixed sediment 99.58 28.9 3.20 1.92 2.63 0.03 2 2.9 90.4
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 49.41 14.3 1.11 1.19 0.87 0.02 2 6.2 86.2
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 29.71 8.6 0.66 0.53 1.43 0.05 4 8.0 77.3
Circalittoral sand 27.92 8.1 3.15 3.06 8.52 0.31 17 16.9 54.5
Circalittoral mud 27.69 8.0 2.57 2.90 6.16 0.22 11 10.3 79.3
Offshore circalittoral mud 21.32 6.2 5.62 4.20 12.45 0.58 34 32.3 41.3
Infralittoral sand 20.94 6.1 7.05 2.85 8.09 0.39 22 22.1 40.6
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 18.11 5.3 3.13 2.79 8.85 0.49 21 17.5 58.4
Infralittoral mixed sediment 17.02 4.9 1.97 0.97 0.56 0.03 2 4.0 86.1
Circalittoral coarse sediment 9.81 2.8 0.30 0.15 0.29 0.03 2 4.2 84.0
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 6.53 1.9 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0 1.4 97.4
Infralittoral coarse sediment 6.49 1.9 0.24 0.19 0.33 0.05 4 10.0 74.6
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 3.41 1.0 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0 4.3 93.8
Offshore circalittoral sand 2.02 0.6 1.18 0.83 2.43 1.20 55 47.6 11.5
Infralittoral mud 1.99 0.6 0.72 0.18 0.21 0.11 7 13.4 68.5
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 1.69 0.5 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.00 0 1.6 97.4
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.58 0.2 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 1 10.6 84.9
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.16 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.1 99.2

Figure 2

Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the Baltic Sea area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the Baltic Sea area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Core fishing grounds

text core fishing grounds

Figure 3

Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Baltic Sea area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.

**Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Baltic Sea area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.**

Figure 4

Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Baltic Sea area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.

**Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Baltic Sea area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.**

Fishing by métier

text fishing by metier

Table 4

Table 4. Landings weight and value by métier and their relationship with swept area in the Baltic Sea area.

DRB_MOL OT_DMF OT_SPF SDN_DMF
Area swept (1000 km2) 0.06 49.78 1.44 1.68
Landings (1000 tonnes) 7.63 18.66 4.49 0.14
Value (Million euro) 0.97 19.35 1.27 0.23
Landings / Area swept 129.81 0.37 3.12 0.08
Value / Area swept 16.52 0.39 0.88 0.14

Impact

text impact

Figure 5

Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the Baltic Sea area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the Baltic Sea area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Figure 6

Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the Baltic Sea area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the Baltic Sea area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Table 5

Table 5. Métier-specific landings weight and value per unit PD or PD-sens impact in the Baltic Sea area.

DRB_MOL OT_DMF OT_SPF SDN_DMF
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD impact 8.976 0.327 8.311 0.167
Value (million euro)/PD impact 1.142 0.339 2.353 0.286
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD-sens impact 5.042 0.213 5.511 0.104
Value (million euro)/PD-sens impact 0.642 0.221 1.560 0.178

Figure 7

Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the Baltic Sea area.

**Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the Baltic Sea area.**

Scenarios

Some overall text about the scenarios

Footprint reduction

text footprint reduction scenario

Table 6: Effort

Table 6. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the Baltic Sea area, on swept area (presented as % of total swept area within that habitat type). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Total area swept (x1000 km2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Circalittoral mixed sediment 99.58 2.63 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 49.41 0.87 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 29.71 1.43 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 5.4
Circalittoral sand 27.92 8.52 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.4 6.1 27.4
Circalittoral mud 27.69 6.16 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 10.8
Offshore circalittoral mud 21.32 12.45 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 4.2 12.3 27.2 52.3
Infralittoral sand 20.94 8.09 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.5 4.6 12.5 33.3
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 18.11 8.85 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.8 6.7 27.6
Infralittoral mixed sediment 17.02 0.56 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3
Circalittoral coarse sediment 9.81 0.29 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 6.53 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 6.49 0.33 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 10.2
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 3.41 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral sand 2.02 2.43 0.0 0.2 1.3 3.7 9.1 18.1 32.4 50.4 69.8
Infralittoral mud 1.99 0.21 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 3.0 17.1
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 1.69 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.58 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.6
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.16 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Table 7: Landings value

Table 7. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the Baltic Sea area, on landings value (in 106 euro). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 344.37 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.6 1.5 3.2 6.8
Circalittoral mixed sediment 99.58 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 49.41 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 29.71 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral sand 27.92 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 1.0
Circalittoral mud 27.69 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.4
Offshore circalittoral mud 21.32 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.2 0.6 1.2 2.3
Infralittoral sand 20.94 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.2 0.6 1.1 1.6
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 18.11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.8
Infralittoral mixed sediment 17.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Circalittoral coarse sediment 9.81 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 6.53 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 6.49 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 3.41 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral sand 2.02 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6
Infralittoral mud 1.99 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 1.69 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.58 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.16 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Table 8: Landings weight

Table 8. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the Baltic Sea area, on landings weight (in 106 kg). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 344.37 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.4 1.8 4.5 8.4 12.9
Circalittoral mixed sediment 99.58 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 49.41 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 29.71 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.2
Circalittoral sand 27.92 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.2 0.4 1.1
Circalittoral mud 27.69 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.4
Offshore circalittoral mud 21.32 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.3 0.8 1.6 2.9
Infralittoral sand 20.94 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.2 3.1 5.3 5.8
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 18.11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.1 0.3 1.0
Infralittoral mixed sediment 17.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Circalittoral coarse sediment 9.81 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 6.53 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 6.49 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 3.41 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral sand 2.02 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.8
Infralittoral mud 1.99 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.1 0.4
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 1.69 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.58 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.16 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Gear modifications

text gear modification scenario

Figure 8: Habitat 1

Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Baltic Sea area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Baltic Sea area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 9: Habitat 2

Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Baltic Sea area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Baltic Sea area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 10: Habitat 3

Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Baltic Sea area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Baltic Sea area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 11: Habitat 4

Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Baltic Sea area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Baltic Sea area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**

Bothnian area

Summary

Table 1

Table 1. Values of pressure and impact indicators for 2017-2022 for three depth strata in the Bothnian_BS area. Values of I-1, I-2, I-3, I-4, I-6a, I-6b, I-7a and I-7b are annual means and I-5 is evaluated over the six years. Descriptions of the pressure and impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

Indicators 0 to 200 m 200 to 400 m 400 m to 800 m
Average fishing intensity (I-1) 0.00 0 NA
Proportion of fished c-squares (I-2) 0.03 0 NA
Proportion of area fished (I-3) 0.00 0 NA
Smallest prop. of c-squares with 90% of total fishing intensity (I-4) 0.01 NA NA
Proportion of persistently unfished c-squares (I-5) 0.97 1 NA
Average PD impact (I-6a) 0.00 0 NA
Average PD-sens impact (I-6b) 0.00 0 NA
Proportion of c-squares with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) 1.00 1 NA
Proportion of c-squares with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b) 1.00 1 NA

Figure 1

Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the Bothnian_BS area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means.

**Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the Bothnian_BS area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means. **

Table 2

Table 2. Contribution of small-scale fisheries (vessels <12 m overall length) to total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) in the Bothnian_BS area. The table shows the total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) by FAO region over the period 2017-2021, and the mean contribution (%), both mean and observed range of small-scale MBCG fisheries. This analysis is based on EU STECF Fisheries Dependent Information (FDI) effort data, which includes consistent information of SSF effort (while ICES VMS data does not). Please see the Main Advice for more information.

FAO region code FAO region name Total fishing effort (kW * Fishing days Mean contribution SSF (%) Observed range SSF contribution (%) [min - max]
27.3.d.29 Archipelago Sea 4063.33 65.00 [18 - 100]
27.3.d.30 Bothnian Sea 30355.17 52.33 [10 - 89]
27.3.d.31 Bothnian Bay 127202.00 57.67 [53 - 63]

Fishing intensity

Table 3

Table 3. Extent (in km2 and %) of broad habitat types in the Bothnian_BS area, and mean annual estimates of MBCG fishing intensity, landings weight, and landings value. In addition, estimates of the average annual proportion of the fished extent, the smallest proportion of the habitat extent affected by 90% of the fishing effort, and the proportion of unfished extent are provided.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Relative habitat abundance (%) Landings (x1000 tonnes) Value (x106 euro) Swept area (x1000 km2) Average fishing intensity Average annual extent fished (%) Smallest proportion of extent with 90% of fishing effort Percentage extent unfished (%)
Circalittoral mixed sediment 56.24 52.6 0.21 0.86 0.13 0.00 0 0.7 98.0
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 28.24 26.4 0.42 1.00 0.20 0.01 1 2.3 93.9
Circalittoral sand 6.91 6.5 0.04 0.25 0.03 0.00 0 0.6 98.7
Infralittoral mixed sediment 4.64 4.3 0.08 0.54 0.05 0.01 1 1.5 96.6
Circalittoral coarse sediment 3.14 2.9 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.00 0 1.2 97.7
Circalittoral mud 2.83 2.7 0.04 0.15 0.02 0.01 1 2.0 93.5
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.77 1.7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.3 99.5
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.33 1.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.1 99.8
Infralittoral sand 0.76 0.7 0.01 0.08 0.01 0.01 1 1.4 96.1
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.44 0.4 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.01 1 3.3 93.3
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.41 0.4 0.01 0.04 0.00 0.01 1 1.5 96.5
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.07 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 NA 100.0
Infralittoral mud 0.06 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.1 99.7
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 0.01 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 NA 94.0
Offshore circalittoral sand 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 NA 100.0
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 NA 100.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 NA 100.0
Offshore circalittoral mud 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 NA 100.0

Figure 2

Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the Bothnian_BS area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the Bothnian_BS area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Core fishing grounds

Figure 3

Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Bothnian_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.

**Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Bothnian_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.**

Figure 4

Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Bothnian_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.

**Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Bothnian_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.**

Fishing by métier

Table 4

Table 4. Landings weight and value by métier and their relationship with swept area in the Bothnian_BS area.

OT_DMF OT_SPF
Area swept (1000 km2) 0.34 0.16
Landings (1000 tonnes) 0.40 0.42
Value (Million euro) 2.56 0.42
Landings / Area swept 1.19 2.67
Value / Area swept 7.58 2.68

Impact

Figure 5

Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the Bothnian_BS area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the Bothnian_BS area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Figure 6

Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the Bothnian_BS area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the Bothnian_BS area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Table 5

Table 5. Métier-specific landings weight and value per unit PD or PD-sens impact in the Bothnian_BS area.

OT_DMF OT_SPF
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD impact 0.903 7.704
Value (million euro)/PD impact 5.734 7.741
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD-sens impact 0.606 5.267
Value (million euro)/PD-sens impact 3.847 5.292

Figure 7

Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the Bothnian_BS area.

**Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the Bothnian_BS area.**

Scenarios

Footprint reduction

Table 6: Effort

Table 6. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the Bothnian_BS area, on swept area (presented as % of total swept area within that habitat type). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Total area swept (x1000 km2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Circalittoral mixed sediment 56.24 0.13 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 28.24 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral sand 6.91 0.03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mixed sediment 4.64 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral coarse sediment 3.14 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud 2.83 0.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.77 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.33 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral sand 0.76 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.44 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.41 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.07 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral mud 0.06 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 0.01 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral sand 0 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Offshore circalittoral mud 0 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Table 7: Landings value

Table 7. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the Bothnian_BS area, on landings value (in 106 euro). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 106.88 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mixed sediment 56.24 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 28.24 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral sand 6.91 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mixed sediment 4.64 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral coarse sediment 3.14 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud 2.83 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.77 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.33 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral sand 0.76 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.44 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.41 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.07 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud 0.06 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral sand 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mud 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Table 8: Landings weight

Table 8. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the Bothnian_BS area, on landings weight (in 106 kg). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 106.88 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mixed sediment 56.24 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 28.24 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral sand 6.91 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mixed sediment 4.64 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral coarse sediment 3.14 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud 2.83 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.77 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.33 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral sand 0.76 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.44 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.41 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.07 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud 0.06 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral sand 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mud 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Gear modifications

Figure 8: Habitat 1

Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Bothnian_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Bothnian_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 9: Habitat 2

Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Bothnian_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Bothnian_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 10: Habitat 3

Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Bothnian_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Bothnian_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 11: Habitat 4

Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Bothnian_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Bothnian_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**

Gulf of Finland

Summary

Table 1

Table 1. Values of pressure and impact indicators for 2017-2022 for three depth strata in the GulfF_BS area. Values of I-1, I-2, I-3, I-4, I-6a, I-6b, I-7a and I-7b are annual means and I-5 is evaluated over the six years. Descriptions of the pressure and impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

Indicators 0 to 200 m 200 to 400 m 400 m to 800 m
Average fishing intensity (I-1) 0 NA NA
Proportion of fished c-squares (I-2) 0 NA NA
Proportion of area fished (I-3) 0 NA NA
Smallest prop. of c-squares with 90% of total fishing intensity (I-4) NA NA NA
Proportion of persistently unfished c-squares (I-5) 1 NA NA
Average PD impact (I-6a) 0 NA NA
Average PD-sens impact (I-6b) 0 NA NA
Proportion of c-squares with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) 1 NA NA
Proportion of c-squares with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b) 1 NA NA

Figure 1

Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the GulfF_BS area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means.

**Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the GulfF_BS area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means. **

Table 2

Table 2. Contribution of small-scale fisheries (vessels <12 m overall length) to total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) in the GulfF_BS area. The table shows the total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) by FAO region over the period 2017-2021, and the mean contribution (%), both mean and observed range of small-scale MBCG fisheries. This analysis is based on EU STECF Fisheries Dependent Information (FDI) effort data, which includes consistent information of SSF effort (while ICES VMS data does not). Please see the Main Advice for more information.

FAO region code FAO region name Total fishing effort (kW * Fishing days Mean contribution SSF (%) Observed range SSF contribution (%) [min - max]

Fishing intensity

Table 3

Table 3. Extent (in km2 and %) of broad habitat types in the GulfF_BS area, and mean annual estimates of MBCG fishing intensity, landings weight, and landings value. In addition, estimates of the average annual proportion of the fished extent, the smallest proportion of the habitat extent affected by 90% of the fishing effort, and the proportion of unfished extent are provided.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Relative habitat abundance (%) Landings (x1000 tonnes) Value (x106 euro) Swept area (x1000 km2) Average fishing intensity Average annual extent fished (%) Smallest proportion of extent with 90% of fishing effort Percentage extent unfished (%)
Circalittoral mud 3.98 24.9 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Offshore circalittoral mud 3.29 20.6 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 3.26 20.4 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Circalittoral mixed sediment 3.23 20.2 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.62 3.9 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Infralittoral mixed sediment 0.38 2.4 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 0.31 2.0 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.21 1.3 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.16 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Infralittoral mud 0.13 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Circalittoral coarse sediment 0.11 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Circalittoral sand 0.10 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.08 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.06 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Infralittoral sand 0.05 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.02 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Offshore circalittoral sand 0.00 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.00 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100

Figure 2

Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the GulfF_BS area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the GulfF_BS area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Core fishing grounds

Figure 3

Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the GulfF_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.

**Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the GulfF_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.**

Figure 4

Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the GulfF_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.

**Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the GulfF_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.**

Fishing by métier

Table 4

Table 4. Landings weight and value by métier and their relationship with swept area in the GulfF_BS area.

DRB_MOL OT_CRU OT_DMF OT_MI OT_SPF SDN_DMF SSC_DMF TBB_CRU TBB_DMF TBB_MOL
Area swept (1000 km2) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Landings (1000 tonnes) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Value (Million euro) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gross value added (Million euro) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Landings / Area swept NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Value / Area swept NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Gross value added / Area swept NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN

Impact

Figure 5

Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the GulfF_BS area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the GulfF_BS area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Figure 6

Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the GulfF_BS area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the GulfF_BS area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Table 5

Table 5. Métier-specific landings weight and value per unit PD or PD-sens impact in the GulfF_BS area.

DRB_MOL OT_CRU OT_DMF OT_MI OT_SPF SDN_DMF SSC_DMF TBB_CRU TBB_DMF TBB_MOL
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD impact NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Value (million euro)/PD impact NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
GVA (million euro)/PD impact NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD-sens impact NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Value (million euro)/PD-sens impact NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
GVA (million euro)/PD-sens impact NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Figure 7

Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the GulfF_BS area.

**Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the GulfF_BS area.**

Scenarios

Footprint reduction

Table 6: Effort

Table 6. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the GulfF_BS area, on swept area (presented as % of total swept area within that habitat type). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Total area swept (x1000 km2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Circalittoral mud 3.98 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Offshore circalittoral mud 3.29 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 3.26 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Circalittoral mixed sediment 3.23 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.62 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral mixed sediment 0.38 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 0.31 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.21 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.16 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral mud 0.13 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Circalittoral coarse sediment 0.11 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Circalittoral sand 0.1 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.08 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.06 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral sand 0.05 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.02 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Offshore circalittoral sand 0 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Table 7: Landings value

Table 7. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the GulfF_BS area, on landings value (in 106 euro). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 15.98 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud 3.98 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mud 3.29 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 3.26 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mixed sediment 3.23 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.62 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mixed sediment 0.38 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 0.31 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.21 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.16 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud 0.13 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral coarse sediment 0.11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral sand 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.08 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.06 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral sand 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral sand 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Table 8: Landings weight

Table 8. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the GulfF_BS area, on landings weight (in 106 kg). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 15.98 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud 3.98 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mud 3.29 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 3.26 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mixed sediment 3.23 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.62 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mixed sediment 0.38 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 0.31 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.21 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.16 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud 0.13 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral coarse sediment 0.11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral sand 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.08 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.06 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral sand 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral sand 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Gear modifications

Figure 8: Habitat 1

Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfF_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfF_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 9: Habitat 2

Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfF_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfF_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 10: Habitat 3

Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfF_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfF_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 11: Habitat 4

Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfF_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfF_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**

Gulf of Riga

Summary

Table 1

Table 1. Values of pressure and impact indicators for 2017-2022 for three depth strata in the GulfR_BS area. Values of I-1, I-2, I-3, I-4, I-6a, I-6b, I-7a and I-7b are annual means and I-5 is evaluated over the six years. Descriptions of the pressure and impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

Indicators 0 to 200 m 200 to 400 m 400 m to 800 m
Average fishing intensity (I-1) 0 NA NA
Proportion of fished c-squares (I-2) 0 NA NA
Proportion of area fished (I-3) 0 NA NA
Smallest prop. of c-squares with 90% of total fishing intensity (I-4) NA NA NA
Proportion of persistently unfished c-squares (I-5) 1 NA NA
Average PD impact (I-6a) 0 NA NA
Average PD-sens impact (I-6b) 0 NA NA
Proportion of c-squares with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) 1 NA NA
Proportion of c-squares with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b) 1 NA NA

Figure 1

Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the GulfR_BS area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means.

**Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the GulfR_BS area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means. **

Table 2

Table 2. Contribution of small-scale fisheries (vessels <12 m overall length) to total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) in the GulfR_BS area. The table shows the total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) by FAO region over the period 2017-2021, and the mean contribution (%), both mean and observed range of small-scale MBCG fisheries. This analysis is based on EU STECF Fisheries Dependent Information (FDI) effort data, which includes consistent information of SSF effort (while ICES VMS data does not). Please see the Main Advice for more information.

FAO region code FAO region name Total fishing effort (kW * Fishing days Mean contribution SSF (%) Observed range SSF contribution (%) [min - max]
27.3.d.28.1 Gulf of Riga 2091.50 100 [100 - 100]
27.3.d.29 Archipelago Sea 4063.33 65 [18 - 100]

Fishing intensity

Table 3

Table 3. Extent (in km2 and %) of broad habitat types in the GulfR_BS area, and mean annual estimates of MBCG fishing intensity, landings weight, and landings value. In addition, estimates of the average annual proportion of the fished extent, the smallest proportion of the habitat extent affected by 90% of the fishing effort, and the proportion of unfished extent are provided.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Relative habitat abundance (%) Landings (x1000 tonnes) Value (x106 euro) Swept area (x1000 km2) Average fishing intensity Average annual extent fished (%) Smallest proportion of extent with 90% of fishing effort Percentage extent unfished (%)
Circalittoral mud 8.54 48.6 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Circalittoral mixed sediment 2.22 12.6 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 1.92 10.9 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Circalittoral sand 1.18 6.7 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Infralittoral mixed sediment 1.14 6.5 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.75 4.3 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Infralittoral sand 0.50 2.9 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.45 2.6 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Infralittoral mud 0.40 2.3 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Circalittoral coarse sediment 0.37 2.1 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.04 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.04 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Offshore circalittoral mud 0.01 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.00 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 NA 100

Figure 2

Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the GulfR_BS area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the GulfR_BS area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Core fishing grounds

Figure 3

Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the GulfR_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.

**Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the GulfR_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.**

Figure 4

Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the GulfR_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.

**Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the GulfR_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.**

Fishing by métier

Table 4

Table 4. Landings weight and value by métier and their relationship with swept area in the GulfR_BS area.

DRB_MOL OT_CRU OT_DMF OT_MI OT_SPF SDN_DMF SSC_DMF TBB_CRU TBB_DMF TBB_MOL
Area swept (1000 km2) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Landings (1000 tonnes) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Value (Million euro) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gross value added (Million euro) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Landings / Area swept NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Value / Area swept NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Gross value added / Area swept NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN

Impact

Figure 5

Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the GulfR_BS area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the GulfR_BS area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Figure 6

Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the GulfR_BS area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the GulfR_BS area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Table 5

Table 5. Métier-specific landings weight and value per unit PD or PD-sens impact in the GulfR_BS area.

DRB_MOL OT_CRU OT_DMF OT_MI OT_SPF SDN_DMF SSC_DMF TBB_CRU TBB_DMF TBB_MOL
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD impact NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Value (million euro)/PD impact NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
GVA (million euro)/PD impact NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD-sens impact NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Value (million euro)/PD-sens impact NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
GVA (million euro)/PD-sens impact NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Figure 7

Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the GulfR_BS area.

**Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the GulfR_BS area.**

Scenarios

Footprint reduction

Table 6: Effort

Table 6. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the GulfR_BS area, on swept area (presented as % of total swept area within that habitat type). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Total area swept (x1000 km2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Circalittoral mud 8.54 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Circalittoral mixed sediment 2.22 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 1.92 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Circalittoral sand 1.18 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral mixed sediment 1.14 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.75 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral sand 0.5 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.45 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral mud 0.4 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Circalittoral coarse sediment 0.37 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.04 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.04 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Offshore circalittoral mud 0.01 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Table 7: Landings value

Table 7. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the GulfR_BS area, on landings value (in 106 euro). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 17.57 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud 8.54 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mixed sediment 2.22 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 1.92 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral sand 1.18 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mixed sediment 1.14 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.75 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral sand 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.45 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral coarse sediment 0.37 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.04 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.04 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mud 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Table 8: Landings weight

Table 8. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the GulfR_BS area, on landings weight (in 106 kg). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 17.57 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud 8.54 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mixed sediment 2.22 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 1.92 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral sand 1.18 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mixed sediment 1.14 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.75 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral sand 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.45 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral mud 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral coarse sediment 0.37 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.04 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.04 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mud 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Gear modifications

Figure 8: Habitat 1

Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfR_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfR_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 9: Habitat 2

Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfR_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfR_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 10: Habitat 3

Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfR_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfR_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 11: Habitat 4

Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfR_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the GulfR_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**

Baltic Proper

Summary

Table 1

Table 1. Values of pressure and impact indicators for 2017-2022 for three depth strata in the Proper_BS area. Values of I-1, I-2, I-3, I-4, I-6a, I-6b, I-7a and I-7b are annual means and I-5 is evaluated over the six years. Descriptions of the pressure and impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

Indicators 0 to 200 m 200 to 400 m 400 m to 800 m
Average fishing intensity (I-1) 0.10 0 0
Proportion of fished c-squares (I-2) 0.22 0 0
Proportion of area fished (I-3) 0.06 0 0
Smallest prop. of c-squares with 90% of total fishing intensity (I-4) 0.07 NA NA
Proportion of persistently unfished c-squares (I-5) 0.78 1 1
Average PD impact (I-6a) 0.00 0 0
Average PD-sens impact (I-6b) 0.00 0 0
Proportion of c-squares with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) 1.00 1 1
Proportion of c-squares with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b) 1.00 1 1

Figure 1

Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the Proper_BS area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means.

**Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the Proper_BS area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means. **

Table 2

Table 2. Contribution of small-scale fisheries (vessels <12 m overall length) to total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) in the Proper_BS area. The table shows the total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) by FAO region over the period 2017-2021, and the mean contribution (%), both mean and observed range of small-scale MBCG fisheries. This analysis is based on EU STECF Fisheries Dependent Information (FDI) effort data, which includes consistent information of SSF effort (while ICES VMS data does not). Please see the Main Advice for more information.

FAO region code FAO region name Total fishing effort (kW * Fishing days Mean contribution SSF (%) Observed range SSF contribution (%) [min - max]
27.3.d.25 Southern Central Baltic - West 695690.17 5.67 [3 - 8]
27.3.d.26 Southern Central Baltic - East 417785.00 0.00 [0 - 0]
27.3.d.27 West of Gotland 37278.33 30.83 [14 - 71]
27.3.d.28.2 East of Gotland (Open sea) 83623.67 9.00 [6 - 13]
27.3.d.29 Archipelago Sea 4063.33 65.00 [18 - 100]

Fishing intensity

Table 3

Table 3. Extent (in km2 and %) of broad habitat types in the Proper_BS area, and mean annual estimates of MBCG fishing intensity, landings weight, and landings value. In addition, estimates of the average annual proportion of the fished extent, the smallest proportion of the habitat extent affected by 90% of the fishing effort, and the proportion of unfished extent are provided.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Relative habitat abundance (%) Landings (x1000 tonnes) Value (x106 euro) Swept area (x1000 km2) Average fishing intensity Average annual extent fished (%) Smallest proportion of extent with 90% of fishing effort Percentage extent unfished (%)
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 28.01 21.5 0.59 0.49 1.28 0.05 4 7.7 79.7
Circalittoral mixed sediment 26.93 20.6 1.92 0.42 0.65 0.02 2 3.2 87.4
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 14.74 11.3 0.54 0.14 0.51 0.03 3 13.3 72.3
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 14.57 11.2 1.37 1.46 4.87 0.33 17 15.0 69.1
Circalittoral sand 9.20 7.0 0.57 0.35 1.29 0.14 8 12.7 55.6
Circalittoral mud 8.76 6.7 0.49 0.27 0.89 0.10 8 12.8 75.6
Offshore circalittoral mud 8.44 6.5 0.86 0.97 2.81 0.33 22 23.8 62.9
Infralittoral mixed sediment 5.28 4.0 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.5 98.9
Circalittoral coarse sediment 4.80 3.7 0.21 0.04 0.09 0.02 2 4.9 83.0
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 4.02 3.1 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0 1.5 97.1
Infralittoral coarse sediment 1.75 1.3 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.00 0 1.6 95.3
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.26 1.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.1 99.9
Infralittoral sand 1.05 0.8 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 1 9.3 83.4
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.55 0.4 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 8.8 89.3
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.38 0.3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2.3 96.2
Offshore circalittoral sand 0.37 0.3 0.17 0.19 0.61 1.66 70 59.4 14.3
Infralittoral mud 0.30 0.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 1.2 97.4
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.14 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.1 99.5

Figure 2

Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the Proper_BS area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the Proper_BS area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Core fishing grounds

Figure 3

Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Proper_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.

**Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Proper_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.**

Figure 4

Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Proper_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.

**Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Proper_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.**

Fishing by métier

Table 4

Table 4. Landings weight and value by métier and their relationship with swept area in the Proper_BS area.

OT_DMF OT_SPF
Area swept (1000 km2) 12.36 0.67
Landings (1000 tonnes) 3.83 2.98
Value (Million euro) 3.79 0.56
Landings / Area swept 0.31 4.42
Value / Area swept 0.31 0.84

Impact

Figure 5

Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the Proper_BS area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the Proper_BS area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Figure 6

Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the Proper_BS area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the Proper_BS area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Table 5

Table 5. Métier-specific landings weight and value per unit PD or PD-sens impact in the Proper_BS area.

OT_DMF OT_SPF
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD impact 0.315 11.966
Value (million euro)/PD impact 0.312 2.263
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD-sens impact 0.212 8.026
Value (million euro)/PD-sens impact 0.210 1.518

Figure 7

Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the Proper_BS area.

**Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the Proper_BS area.**

Scenarios

Footprint reduction

Table 6: Effort

Table 6. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the Proper_BS area, on swept area (presented as % of total swept area within that habitat type). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Total area swept (x1000 km2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 28.01 1.28 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 4.4
Circalittoral mixed sediment 26.93 0.65 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 14.74 0.51 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 17.3
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 14.57 4.87 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 1.9 25.7
Circalittoral sand 9.2 1.29 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.5 4.8 13.1
Circalittoral mud 8.76 0.89 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 20.9
Offshore circalittoral mud 8.44 2.81 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 16.5 40.1
Infralittoral mixed sediment 5.28 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral coarse sediment 4.8 0.09 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.1
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 4.02 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 1.75 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.26 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral sand 1.05 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.3
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.55 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.1
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.38 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral sand 0.37 0.61 0.0 0.2 2.9 9.2 24.4 38.9 50.6 66.5 84.7
Infralittoral mud 0.3 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.14 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Table 7: Landings value

Table 7. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the Proper_BS area, on landings value (in 106 euro). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 130.55 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.4 1.2
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 28.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral mixed sediment 26.93 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 14.74 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 14.57 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 0.4
Circalittoral sand 9.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral mud 8.76 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral mud 8.44 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.2 0.4
Infralittoral mixed sediment 5.28 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral coarse sediment 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 4.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 1.75 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.26 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral sand 1.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.55 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.38 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral sand 0.37 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2
Infralittoral mud 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.14 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Table 8: Landings weight

Table 8. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the Proper_BS area, on landings weight (in 106 kg). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 130.55 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.5 1.5
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 28.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.2
Circalittoral mixed sediment 26.93 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 14.74 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 14.57 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.1 0.4
Circalittoral sand 9.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral mud 8.76 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.1
Offshore circalittoral mud 8.44 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.2 0.4
Infralittoral mixed sediment 5.28 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Circalittoral coarse sediment 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 4.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral coarse sediment 1.75 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 1.26 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Infralittoral sand 1.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.55 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.38 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral sand 0.37 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1
Infralittoral mud 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.14 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Gear modifications

Figure 8: Habitat 1

Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Proper_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Proper_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 9: Habitat 2

Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Proper_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Proper_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 10: Habitat 3

Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Proper_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Proper_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 11: Habitat 4

Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Proper_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Proper_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**

Arkona & Bornholm Basin

Summary

Table 1

Table 1. Values of pressure and impact indicators for 2017-2022 for three depth strata in the ArkBor_BS area. Values of I-1, I-2, I-3, I-4, I-6a, I-6b, I-7a and I-7b are annual means and I-5 is evaluated over the six years. Descriptions of the pressure and impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

Indicators 0 to 200 m 200 to 400 m 400 m to 800 m
Average fishing intensity (I-1) 0.50 NA NA
Proportion of fished c-squares (I-2) 0.70 NA NA
Proportion of area fished (I-3) 0.28 NA NA
Smallest prop. of c-squares with 90% of total fishing intensity (I-4) 0.25 NA NA
Proportion of persistently unfished c-squares (I-5) 0.30 NA NA
Average PD impact (I-6a) 0.01 NA NA
Average PD-sens impact (I-6b) 0.01 NA NA
Proportion of c-squares with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) 1.00 NA NA
Proportion of c-squares with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b) 1.00 NA NA

Figure 1

Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the ArkBor_BS area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means.

**Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the ArkBor_BS area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means. **

Table 2

Table 2. Contribution of small-scale fisheries (vessels <12 m overall length) to total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) in the ArkBor_BS area. The table shows the total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) by FAO region over the period 2017-2021, and the mean contribution (%), both mean and observed range of small-scale MBCG fisheries. This analysis is based on EU STECF Fisheries Dependent Information (FDI) effort data, which includes consistent information of SSF effort (while ICES VMS data does not). Please see the Main Advice for more information.

FAO region code FAO region name Total fishing effort (kW * Fishing days Mean contribution SSF (%) Observed range SSF contribution (%) [min - max]
27.3.b.23 The Sound 11237.0 41.83 [7 - 75]
27.3.d.24 Baltic West of Bornholm 449995.7 11.67 [11 - 13]
27.3.d.25 Southern Central Baltic - West 695690.2 5.67 [3 - 8]

Fishing intensity

Table 3

Table 3. Extent (in km2 and %) of broad habitat types in the ArkBor_BS area, and mean annual estimates of MBCG fishing intensity, landings weight, and landings value. In addition, estimates of the average annual proportion of the fished extent, the smallest proportion of the habitat extent affected by 90% of the fishing effort, and the proportion of unfished extent are provided.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Relative habitat abundance (%) Landings (x1000 tonnes) Value (x106 euro) Swept area (x1000 km2) Average fishing intensity Average annual extent fished (%) Smallest proportion of extent with 90% of fishing effort Percentage extent unfished (%)
Infralittoral sand 11.38 20.2 1.48 1.30 5.64 0.50 29 28.0 27.4
Circalittoral mixed sediment 10.52 18.7 0.97 0.50 1.58 0.15 10 15.6 54.4
Offshore circalittoral mud 9.38 16.6 4.64 3.05 9.21 0.98 57 50.6 2.1
Circalittoral sand 8.37 14.8 1.49 1.11 4.30 0.51 36 37.3 18.0
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 3.25 5.8 1.75 1.31 3.95 1.21 38 30.7 7.1
Infralittoral coarse sediment 2.84 5.0 0.08 0.04 0.11 0.04 3 12.9 67.1
Infralittoral mixed sediment 2.78 4.9 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.03 2 13.3 68.3
Circalittoral mud 1.68 3.0 0.74 0.56 1.69 1.01 57 54.9 3.3
Offshore circalittoral sand 1.46 2.6 0.96 0.56 1.67 1.14 54 47.4 7.6
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 1.38 2.4 0.07 0.05 0.15 0.11 8 17.8 23.1
Circalittoral coarse sediment 1.27 2.3 0.03 0.02 0.08 0.06 5 18.0 53.1
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 1.25 2.2 0.14 0.06 0.17 0.13 13 34.5 18.7
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.54 0.9 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 1 22.5 61.9
Infralittoral mud 0.19 0.3 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.17 16 56.3 7.6
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.07 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 7 43.6 33.2
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.04 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 NA 100.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.03 0.1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 10 41.4 3.6
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.36 30 NA 0.0

Figure 2

Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the ArkBor_BS area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the ArkBor_BS area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Core fishing grounds

Figure 3

Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the ArkBor_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.

**Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the ArkBor_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.**

Figure 4

Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the ArkBor_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.

**Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the ArkBor_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.**

Fishing by métier

Table 4

Table 4. Landings weight and value by métier and their relationship with swept area in the ArkBor_BS area.

OT_DMF OT_SPF SDN_DMF
Area swept (1000 km2) 27.62 0.57 0.48
Landings (1000 tonnes) 11.44 0.94 0.03
Value (Million euro) 8.28 0.25 0.05
Landings / Area swept 0.41 1.64 0.07
Value / Area swept 0.30 0.43 0.11

Impact

Figure 5

Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the ArkBor_BS area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the ArkBor_BS area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Figure 6

Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the ArkBor_BS area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the ArkBor_BS area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Table 5

Table 5. Métier-specific landings weight and value per unit PD or PD-sens impact in the ArkBor_BS area.

OT_DMF OT_SPF SDN_DMF
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD impact 0.372 4.277 0.142
Value (million euro)/PD impact 0.269 1.131 0.246
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD-sens impact 0.246 2.798 0.091
Value (million euro)/PD-sens impact 0.178 0.740 0.157

Figure 7

Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the ArkBor_BS area.

**Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the ArkBor_BS area.**

Scenarios

Footprint reduction

Table 6: Effort

Table 6. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the ArkBor_BS area, on swept area (presented as % of total swept area within that habitat type). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Total area swept (x1000 km2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Infralittoral sand 11.38 5.64 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.4 1.5 3.8 8.6 19.2 40.7
Circalittoral mixed sediment 10.52 1.58 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.6 5.0 20.0
Offshore circalittoral mud 9.38 9.21 0.2 0.9 2.2 5.5 10.5 19.1 30.5 45.4 66.0
Circalittoral sand 8.37 4.3 0.0 <0.1 0.3 1.2 3.2 7.7 19.1 35.4 59.5
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 3.25 3.95 <0.1 0.3 0.8 1.5 3.0 5.6 10.4 17.6 33.6
Infralittoral coarse sediment 2.84 0.11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 4.5 14.7
Infralittoral mixed sediment 2.78 0.07 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 5.7 15.1
Circalittoral mud 1.68 1.69 0.1 0.7 2.2 6.5 13.7 23.3 33.4 46.9 69.7
Offshore circalittoral sand 1.46 1.67 <0.1 0.4 1.6 4.2 9.3 16.5 30.9 48.3 68.9
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 1.38 0.15 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.2 2.3 3.9 6.3 9.7 17.1
Circalittoral coarse sediment 1.27 0.08 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 4.1 9.3 17.8
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 1.25 0.17 0.0 0.2 1.0 2.0 4.2 7.3 15.2 29.1 56.1
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.54 0.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.8 15.9 36.5
Infralittoral mud 0.19 0.03 0.4 3.4 5.8 8.6 17.1 21.7 30.4 58.0 74.8
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.07 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 3.4 29.7 44.1 71.7 100.0
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.04 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.03 0 0.3 2.2 2.9 4.8 11.6 18.7 53.1 53.1 79.2
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0 0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 17.2 17.2 100.0 100.0
Table 7: Landings value

Table 7. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the ArkBor_BS area, on landings value (in 106 euro). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 56.42 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.1 1.9 3.0 4.7
Infralittoral sand 11.38 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6
Circalittoral mixed sediment 10.52 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1
Offshore circalittoral mud 9.38 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 1.0 1.4 2.0
Circalittoral sand 8.37 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 3.25 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4
Infralittoral coarse sediment 2.84 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral mixed sediment 2.78 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral mud 1.68 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Offshore circalittoral sand 1.46 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 1.38 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral coarse sediment 1.27 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 1.25 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.54 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral mud 0.19 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.07 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.04 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.03 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Table 8: Landings weight

Table 8. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the ArkBor_BS area, on landings weight (in 106 kg). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 56.42 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 1.7 2.8 4.3 6.9
Infralittoral sand 11.38 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8
Circalittoral mixed sediment 10.52 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2
Offshore circalittoral mud 9.38 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.5 2.2 3.0
Circalittoral sand 8.37 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.9
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 3.25 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7
Infralittoral coarse sediment 2.84 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral mixed sediment 2.78 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral mud 1.68 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5
Offshore circalittoral sand 1.46 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6
Offshore circalittoral mud or Offshore circalittoral sand 1.38 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral coarse sediment 1.27 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral mud or Circalittoral sand 1.25 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.54 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral mud 0.19 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.07 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral mud or Infralittoral sand 0.04 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.03 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Gear modifications

Figure 8: Habitat 1

Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the ArkBor_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the ArkBor_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 9: Habitat 2

Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the ArkBor_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the ArkBor_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 10: Habitat 3

Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the ArkBor_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the ArkBor_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 11: Habitat 4

Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the ArkBor_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the ArkBor_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**

Western Baltic Sea

Summary

Table 1

Table 1. Values of pressure and impact indicators for 2017-2022 for three depth strata in the Western_BS area. Values of I-1, I-2, I-3, I-4, I-6a, I-6b, I-7a and I-7b are annual means and I-5 is evaluated over the six years. Descriptions of the pressure and impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

Indicators 0 to 200 m 200 to 400 m 400 m to 800 m
Average fishing intensity (I-1) 0.60 NA NA
Proportion of fished c-squares (I-2) 0.61 NA NA
Proportion of area fished (I-3) 0.25 NA NA
Smallest prop. of c-squares with 90% of total fishing intensity (I-4) 0.19 NA NA
Proportion of persistently unfished c-squares (I-5) 0.39 NA NA
Average PD impact (I-6a) 0.02 NA NA
Average PD-sens impact (I-6b) 0.02 NA NA
Proportion of c-squares with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) 0.99 NA NA
Proportion of c-squares with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b) 0.98 NA NA

Figure 1

Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the Western_BS area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means.

**Figure 1. Geographic distribution of fishing intensity (Swept Area Ratio), seabed sensitivity (community longevity), total landings value, and total landings weight from mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) in the Western_BS area. The maps of swept area ratio, landings value, and landings weight show annual means. **

Table 2

Table 2. Contribution of small-scale fisheries (vessels <12 m overall length) to total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) in the Western_BS area. The table shows the total fishing effort (kW * fishing days) by FAO region over the period 2017-2021, and the mean contribution (%), both mean and observed range of small-scale MBCG fisheries. This analysis is based on EU STECF Fisheries Dependent Information (FDI) effort data, which includes consistent information of SSF effort (while ICES VMS data does not). Please see the Main Advice for more information.

FAO region code FAO region name Total fishing effort (kW * Fishing days Mean contribution SSF (%) Observed range SSF contribution (%) [min - max]
27.3.c.22 Belt Sea 746329.5 22.67 [18 - 30]
27.3.d.24 Baltic West of Bornholm 449995.7 11.67 [11 - 13]

Fishing intensity

Table 3

Table 3. Extent (in km2 and %) of broad habitat types in the Western_BS area, and mean annual estimates of MBCG fishing intensity, landings weight, and landings value. In addition, estimates of the average annual proportion of the fished extent, the smallest proportion of the habitat extent affected by 90% of the fishing effort, and the proportion of unfished extent are provided.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Relative habitat abundance (%) Landings (x1000 tonnes) Value (x106 euro) Swept area (x1000 km2) Average fishing intensity Average annual extent fished (%) Smallest proportion of extent with 90% of fishing effort Percentage extent unfished (%)
Infralittoral sand 7.20 42.4 5.55 1.47 2.43 0.34 17 18.8 44.8
Infralittoral mixed sediment 2.80 16.5 1.84 0.40 0.43 0.15 8 13.4 54.7
Circalittoral sand 2.16 12.7 1.05 1.36 2.90 1.35 45 34.9 22.3
Circalittoral mud 1.91 11.2 1.29 1.92 3.56 1.87 68 53.4 6.3
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.98 5.8 0.13 0.11 0.21 0.21 15 27.0 37.1
Infralittoral mud 0.91 5.4 0.71 0.17 0.18 0.20 11 18.3 51.4
Circalittoral mixed sediment 0.44 2.6 0.10 0.14 0.27 0.63 28 27.0 30.2
Offshore circalittoral mud 0.20 1.2 0.12 0.17 0.42 2.16 84 66.7 1.1
Offshore circalittoral sand 0.18 1.1 0.04 0.08 0.15 0.81 34 29.5 32.7
Circalittoral coarse sediment 0.11 0.6 0.04 0.06 0.12 1.15 49 41.7 15.4
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.05 0.3 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.62 18 12.9 61.4
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.03 0.2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 1 5.8 90.9
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 7 NA 50.8
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.00 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 NA 100.0

Figure 2

Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the Western_BS area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 2. Temporal variation of the pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 in the Western_BS area. Descriptions of the pressure indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Core fishing grounds

Figure 3

Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Western_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.

**Figure 3. Spatial stability of core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Western_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included. The numbers between brackets show the proportion of fished extent compared to the overall assessed area extent.**

Figure 4

Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Western_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.

**Figure 4. Spatial distribution of the stability of the core MBCG fishing grounds, presented as the number of years a csquare is identified as a core fishing ground (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) per métier for the Western_BS area. Only métiers that were active within >50 unique c-squares during the period 2017-2022 are included.**

Fishing by métier

Table 4

Table 4. Landings weight and value by métier and their relationship with swept area in the Western_BS area.

DRB_MOL OT_DMF OT_SPF SDN_DMF
Area swept (1000 km2) 0.06 9.47 0.03 1.20
Landings (1000 tonnes) 7.63 2.99 0.15 0.11
Value (Million euro) 0.97 4.72 0.04 0.18
Landings / Area swept 129.81 0.32 4.54 0.09
Value / Area swept 16.52 0.50 1.09 0.15

Impact

Figure 5

Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the Western_BS area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 5. The spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact in the Western_BS area, as assessed with the PD indicator (I-6a) and PD-sens indicator (I-6b), shown as annual means for 2017-2022. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Figure 6

Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the Western_BS area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.

**Figure 6. Temporal variation in values of the PD indicator (I-6a), PD-sens indicator (I-6b), proportion of area with PD impact < 0.2 (I-7a) and proportion of area with PD-sens impact < 0.2 (I-7b), shown for the overall area and for the four most extensive broad habitat types separately in the Western_BS area. Descriptions of the impact indicators are provided in the ‘Essential Information’ Table E1 in this document.**

Table 5

Table 5. Métier-specific landings weight and value per unit PD or PD-sens impact in the Western_BS area.

DRB_MOL OT_DMF OT_SPF SDN_DMF
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD impact 8.976 0.218 8.898 0.176
Value (million euro)/PD impact 1.142 0.343 2.127 0.300
Landings (1000 tonnes)/PD-sens impact 5.042 0.133 5.418 0.108
Value (million euro)/PD-sens impact 0.642 0.210 1.295 0.185

Figure 7

Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the Western_BS area.

**Figure 7. Métier-related impacts, as measured with the PD indicator (top) and PD-sens indicator (bottom), on the four most extensive broad habitat types in the Western_BS area.**

Scenarios

Footprint reduction

Table 6: Effort

Table 6. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the Western_BS area, on swept area (presented as % of total swept area within that habitat type). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) Total area swept (x1000 km2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Infralittoral sand 7.2 2.43 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.8 2.9 8.7 27.6
Infralittoral mixed sediment 2.8 0.43 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.2 4.0 15.4
Circalittoral sand 2.16 2.9 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.4 1.9 7.4 14.8 29.4 51.1
Circalittoral mud 1.91 3.56 <0.1 0.5 2.3 5.9 12.1 23.4 35.9 51.7 69.2
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.98 0.21 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.9 4.1 9.1 16.0 36.1
Infralittoral mud 0.91 0.18 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 1.5 8.2 29.0
Circalittoral mixed sediment 0.44 0.27 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.0 2.7 8.7 23.8 46.5
Offshore circalittoral mud 0.2 0.42 1.1 3.2 11.1 16.3 28.0 42.7 50.6 68.9 81.3
Offshore circalittoral sand 0.18 0.15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.6 5.7 10.4 24.8 47.2
Circalittoral coarse sediment 0.11 0.12 0.0 <0.1 0.9 2.1 6.4 11.6 22.5 41.3 65.8
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.05 0.03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 6.1 27.5
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.03 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.6 46.5 46.5 46.5
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0 0 NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Table 7: Landings value

Table 7. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the Western_BS area, on landings value (in 106 euro). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 16.96 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.3 0.7 1.3 2.4 3.6
Infralittoral sand 7.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.6 0.9
Infralittoral mixed sediment 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2
Circalittoral sand 2.16 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7
Circalittoral mud 1.91 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.7 1.0 1.3
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.98 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral mud 0.91 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral mixed sediment 0.44 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral mud 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1
Offshore circalittoral sand 0.18 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral coarse sediment 0.11 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Table 8: Landings weight

Table 8. The effects of stepwise exclusion of all MBCG fisheries from a specified proportion of a MSFD broad habitat type within the Western_BS area, on landings weight (in 106 kg). The stepwise exclusion is conducted in 10% increments, and within each successive increment from 10% to 90% the c-squares with the lowest recorded rank MBCG swept area are excluded. Note that the top row shows the total estimate for all habitats combined.

MSFD broad habitat type Extent of habitat (x1000 km2) 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Total 16.96 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.3 0.5 1.1 2.7 6.3 9.0
Infralittoral sand 7.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.4 1.6 4.3 5.2
Infralittoral mixed sediment 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.1 0.4 1.3
Circalittoral sand 2.16 0.0 0.0 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6
Circalittoral mud 1.91 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9
Infralittoral coarse sediment 0.98 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral mud 0.91 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 0.3 0.6
Circalittoral mixed sediment 0.44 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral mud 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral sand 0.18 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral coarse sediment 0.11 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef 0.03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Gear modifications

Figure 8: Habitat 1

Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Western_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 8. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Western_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 9: Habitat 2

Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Western_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 9. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Western_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 10: Habitat 3

Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Western_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 10. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Western_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**
Figure 11: Habitat 4

Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Western_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.

**Figure 11. Effects of gear modifications (5%, 10%, and 20% lower depletion) on the quality-quantity threshold for the most abundant MSFD habitat type in the Western_BS area. Habitat quality is defined as 1 - impact, with impact calculated as PD (I-6a) or PD-sens (I-7a). The dotted line represent the extent threshold of 75%.**

Essential information

Content of this advice product

This document presents information on the distribution, intensity, impact, and economic value of mobile bottom-contacting gear (MBCG) fisheries within the Baltic Sea area, and estimated consequences and costs (landings weight and value) of reducing their relative extent. The information is from an assessment for the Baltic Sea area for the period 2017-2022. The six-year period was selected to include the latest available Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) and logbook data, rather than to match a specific Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) assessment period (EU, 2008).

The assessment describes fishing intensity and impact with five pressure indicators and four benthic impact indicators (Table E1).

Table E1. Pressure and impact indicators that are applied by (sub-)regional and subdivision area, including the spatial scale and period over which the indicators are calculated.

Indicator code Indicator name Indicator type Description Spatial scale Period
I-1 Average fishing intensity Pressure Average number of times a defined area is swept by mobile bottom-contacting gears (MBCG). Estimated as the sum of swept area for all vessels using MBCG divided by the total area of the defined area (e.g. within a depth range or broad habitat type). Absolute extent (m2) Year
I-2 Proportion of fished c-squares Pressure The number of c-squares fished at least once by MBCG (irrespective of the swept area within the c-square), divided by the total number of c-squares within a defined area. C-square Year
I-3 Proportion of area fished Pressure The sum of swept area across all c-squares in a defined area, where swept area in a specific c-square cannot be greater than the area of that c-square, divided by the summed area of all c-squares. Absolute extent (m2) Year
I-4 Smallest proportion of c-squares with 90% of total fishing intensity Pressure The smallest proportion of the c-squares where 90% of the total swept area occurs. C-square Year
I-5 Proportion of persistently unfished c-squares Pressure The inverse of I-2, evaluated over six years. C-square Assessment period
I-6a Average PD impact Impact The annual mean PD impact (Population Dynamics method, impact indicator) evaluated for a defined area. C-square Year
I-6b Average PD-sens impact Impact The annual mean PD-sens impact (Population Dynamics method, impact indicator for sensitive species) evaluated for a defined area. C-square Year
I-7a Proportion of c-squares with PD impact < 0.2 Impact The proportion of c-squares within the defined area, where PD <0.2. C-square Year
I-7b Proportion of c-squares with PD-sens impact < 0.2 Impact The proportion of c-squares within the defined area, where PD-sens <0.2. C-square Year

For each defined assessment area and subdivision, tabs lead to ‘summary’ information and information on ‘fishing intensity’, ‘core fishing grounds’, ‘fishing by métier’, ‘impact’ and ‘scenarios’ (Table E2).

Table E2. Information provided in the tabs for each assessment area.

Tab Description
Summary
  • Values of pressure indicators I-1 to I-5 and impact indicators I-6a, I-6b, I-7a and I-7b by depth strata (Table 1).
  • Maps of swept area  ratio, median longevity of benthic fauna, and landings value and weight (Figure 1).
  • Estimates of the contribution of small-scale fisheries (MBCG vessels <12m overall length) to total fishing effort in kW*fishing days (Table 2).
Fishing intensity
  • The extent of broad habitat types, and various estimates of MBCG fishing activity for those habitat types; fisheries landings, value, and intensity (Table 3).
  • Temporal variation of pressure indicators I-1, I-3 and I-4 (Figure 2).
Core fishing grounds
  • Spatial stability of core fishing grounds (smallest area responsible for 90% of the landings value) over time (Figure 3) and their spatial distribution (Figure 4).
Fishing by métier
  • Estimates of swept area, landings weight and landings value for the active métiers (Table 4).
Impact
  • Spatial distribution of MBCG fisheries impact indicator values (I-6a) and (I-6b) (Figure 5).
  • Temporal variation of impact indicators I-6a, I-6b, I-7a, and I-7b (Figure 6).
  • Landings weight and value per unit impact for the active métiers (Table 5).
  • Métier-specific impacts for the four most extensive broad habitat types (Figure 7).
Scenarios
  • A ‘Footprint reduction’ scenario presenting effects of stepwise exclusion of MBCG fisheries in each broad habitat type, in terms of effort reduction (Table 6), landings value (Table 7), and landings weight (Table 8).
  • A ‘Gear modifications’ scenario presenting the effects of gear modifications (assumed reduction in the depletion of benthic faunal biomass after a gear pass) on the quality-quantity threshold for the four most extensive habitat types (Figures 8-11).
Data limitations in the Baltic Sea region

No fishing activity data is available from Russia.

Temporal patterns in fishing activity are available from 2009 for vessels over 15m and from 2012 for vessels over 12m. Temporal variation in fishing activity hence represents vessels over 15m (2009-2011) and vessels over 12m (2012-2018). The assessment maps and indicator values produced are based on an average for 2013-2018.

Figure E1. Map of the assessment area, showing the water depth class distributions (left), and boundaries of the relevant (MSFD) divisions and FAO rgeions (right).

**Figure E1. Map of the assessment area, showing the water depth class distributions (left), and boundaries of the relevant (MSFD) divisions and FAO rgeions (right).**
How is fishing intensity evaluated?

Five pressure indicators were used to describe fishing intensity and distribution resulting from the use of MBCG (Table E1). These indicators are calculated, for any given area as defined in this document, from estimates of the swept area in each of the c-squares within a defined area of interest. The swept area is calculated as hours fished × average fishing speed × gear width. This requires that VMS location records are linked to logbook data to associate a location and speed with gear code and fishing activity (Data Collection Framework level 4 and 6 respectively). VMS locations are allocated to ‘fishing’ and ‘not fishing’ based on vessel speed and other filters (ICES, 2022). The gear width is estimated based on relationships between average gear widths and average vessel length or engine power (kW) (Eigaard et al. 2016; ICES, 2022). The Swept Area Ratio (SAR) is calculated as the sum of the swept area attributed to all MBCG fishing recorded in the c-square within a year, divided by the area of that c-square. Therefore, the SAR indicates the theoretical number of times a c-square is swept per year, assuming that the MBCG fishing is evenly distributed over the c-square. For example, a SAR of 2 means that the entire c-square is fished 2 times over the year, a SAR of 0.5 means that the entire c-square is fished once in two years.

How is benthic impact evaluated?

Four indicators were used to describe benthic impacts. These indicators are generated from the assessment methods PD and PD-sens. PD (population dynamics method) is used to estimate the loss of benthic biomass, relative to carrying capacity, from a defined area if the current MBCG fishing intensity continues indefinitely (Pitcher et al., 2017, ICES 2018, 2022, Hiddink et al., 2019). PD-sens (population dynamics method for sensitive fauna) is used to estimate the loss of biomass of sensitive benthic fauna (the 10% most long-lived biomass fraction), relative to carrying capacity, from a defined area if the current MBCG fishing intensity continues indefinitely (ICES, 2024). For this advice, PD and PD-sens are estimated at the c-square scale.

PD and PD-sens are estimated from SAR and parameters for depletion (proportional mortality) per pass of a MBCG and the intrinsic rate of increase of biomass of the benthic community (Pitcher et al. 2017). Estimates of depletion were métier-specific and taken from Rijnsdorp et al (2020). The intrinsic rate of increase is estimated from the predicted local distribution of maximum ages in an unimpacted benthic community (Rijnsdorp et al 2018). When PD-sens rather than PD is calculated, only the 10% most long-lived biomass fraction of this community is used to estimate the intrinsic rate of increase, to address the component of the benthic biomass most sensitive to MBCG. Further details are provided in [ref to the main advice text or WK reports].

How are landings values evaluated?

VMS location records are linked to logbook data to associate a location with gear code and fishing activity (Data Collection Framework level 4 and 6 respectively), and with landings weight and landings value records. VMS location records are classified as ‘fishing’ and ‘not fishing’ based on vessel speed and other filters (ICES, 2022). Landings weight and value are then allocated to the VMS location records classified as fishing, based on the time interval between location records or an equal split among location records by day, by ICES rectangle or by trip. Total landings weight or value by c-square, in a given time-interval, are calculated as the sum of the allocations to each location record in that c-square.

References

Eigaard O.R., Bastardie F., Breen M.l., Dinesen G.E., Lafargue P., Nielsen J.R., et al. 2016. Estimating seafloor pressure from trawls and dredges based on gear design and dimensions. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 73(1): 27-43 https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsv099

EU. 2008. Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive) (Text with EEA relevance)

Hiddink, J. G., Jennings, S., Sciberras, M., Bolam, S. G., Cambiè, G., McConnaughey, R. A., Mazor, T., et al. 2019 Assessing bottom-trawling impacts based on the longevity of benthic invertebrates. Journal of Applied Ecology, 56: 1075–1083. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13278.

ICES. 2018. Interim Report of the Working Group on Fisheries Benthic Impact and Trade-offs (WGFBIT), 12–16 November 2018, ICES Headquarters, Copenhagen, Denmark. ICES CM 2018/HAPISG:21. 74 pp.

ICES. 2022. Working Group on Fisheries Benthic Impact and Trade-offs (WGFBIT; outputs from 2021meeting). ICES Scientific Reports. 4:9. 133 pp. http://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.10042

Pitcher, C. R., Ellis, N., Jennings, S., Hiddink, J. G., Mazor, T., Kaiser, M. J., Kangas, M. I., et al. 2017. Estimating the sustainability of towed fishing-gear impacts on seabed habitats: a simple quantitative risk assessment method applicable to data-limited fisheries. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 8: 472–480. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12705.

Rijnsdorp, A. D., Bolam, S. G., Garcia, C., Hiddink, J. G., Hintzen, N. T., van Denderen, D. P., and Van Kooten, T. 2018. Estimating sensitivity of seabed habitats to disturbance by bottom trawling based on the longevity of benthic fauna. Ecological Applications, 28: 1302–1312. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1731

Rijnsdorp AD, Hiddink JG, van Denderen PD, Hintzen NT, Eigaard OR, Valanko S, Bastardie F, Bolam SG, Boulcott P, Egekvist J, Garcia C. 2020. Different bottom trawl fisheries have a differential impact on the status of the North Sea seafloor habitats. ICES Journal of Marine Science. 77(5): 1772-86. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsaa050